Definition of terms.
Preliminaries on soul and consciousness
The philosophy of soul and consciousness philosophical travels within a yogi life (key analysis blog) has a historical context pertaining to the Brahma Kumaris analysis (link to site) that in the 1980’s engaged my biographical philosophical investigations (biographical page) into the nature of consciousness. The group dynamics gave a religious underpinning to my philosophical quest which subsequently became somewhat independent of religious non governmental organisations.
Categorical features of the soul.
It is taken for granted as an analytic model of the soul that sub categorical features exist of the unitary substance. The sub categories are the standard paradigm, similar to the atom being split into electrons, protons and neutrons. The soul could then have as the standard model (advocated by contemporary yoga schools such as the Brahama Kumaris) a mind-intellect-impressions complex. However if consciousness is a sub category of mind or intellect or impressions it would led to ontological danglers. That means a redundancy if further division of any sub category was not possible. This indeed appears what the model suggests since consciousness seems intrinsic to each sub division of mind-intellect-impressions.
Does consciousness supervene the soul? (are we mind dust?)
If no separate category is sufficient for consciousness to exist within the mind-intellect-impressions paradigm (soul) then consciousness necessarily exists as a higher order or underlying principle somewhat similar to the ‘Higgs field’ in particle physics theory. This is somewhat significant, for it directly correlates to interaction with the micro physical structure of the universe/world. If so, and the soul theory is a feature of reality then consciousness supervenes as a field similar to the Higgs field in particle physics.
Does consciousness supervene soul/matter?
If the standard model of the soul entails a complete distinct ontology it posses a problem for unitary consciousness. The logical response to the problem is a natural mind/body dualism. However an unintended consequence is a split of consciousness into two non binary ontological categories. This places the problem on the mind-intellect-impressions paradigm upon itself. If a non material identity (mind-intellect-impressions) is a distinct stuff of the universe then to perceive physical stuff is through being conscious through experience. The human sense of colour, taste and the sounds is what counts as being conscious, but for example a bat which experiences objects through some sonic experience inverts the humanistic paradigm, but still counts as being a conscious entity. This for a human entails being able to listen to other humans. This perception assumes the other mind hypothesis. The case of a mind-intellect-impressions collective is based on the assumption of perception and the hypothesis of other minds. However this entails a paradox. If the soul exists as an independent substrate, call it “mind dust” then perception would be true to only itself, (neural network) but not itself as a soul (mind, intellect, impressions). This could be metaphorically understood as a causal gap. There is a gap between the soul and the micro material/chemical structure as neural activity of the brain which emerges as perception. The only reasonable way out to the paradox of dualism is to except a form of Panpsychism (wiki) or a form of physicalism that correlates conscious qualitative states to regions of the brain. It was this sense that led me to research ways to connect with consciousness as a substrate through the use of harmonics (biographical blog). However research through academic philosophy seemed to tip the balance to a theory of brain state-space consciousness (blog).